- From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 18:40:26 +0000
- To: Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net>, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com>
- Cc: Anders Rundgren <anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>, W3C Credentials Community Group <public-credentials@w3.org>, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>, public-webid <public-webid@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAM1Sok2rC-vjMgWpr2zXvBTEUdfLQVWvA32YuAvv+NaNDofpfQ@mail.gmail.com>
First off - inspirational work Kaliya... On Wed, 17 Aug 2016, 4:23 AM Kaliya IDwoman <kaliya-id@identitywoman.net> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 5:51 AM, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com > > wrote: > >> What is the business case for a service provider to adopt Solid? >> > > 1) first off I'm super skeptical of any project that is > university/research based it is notoriously difficult to get those to > escape the lab as it where. Everyone has incentive to "publish" for their > degrees/professorships - zero incentive to make a usable, market > worthy/ready product (I don't just mean in a business way relative to > market but adoptable in the marketplace of tools and software) > > 2) The Personal Data Ecosystem Consortium that I founded in 2010 > http://www.pde.cc has a whole range of companies that have been working > on similar technology and ideas for well over 5 years. So it isn't new - > the ideas around personal data stores/banks etc and putting people at the > center of their own data lives go back at least to Johannes' Ernst work > (See the top of my twitter for a diagram he drew in 2005-6. And the > Augmented Social Network White Paper which itself and antecedents in other > work. http://asn.planetwork.net > > 3) Please show me what Tim has lead that has gotten to market besides HTML > back in the day? > I'm sure you mean TimBL, and I think it's important to note the web foundation, the w3c, the web we want campaign and of course ODI and Webscience related works; which is amongst his very broad-spectrum of interests that are all very complex and surely time-consuming. I think Sandro was amongst the earlier 'cross cloud' focused individuals, alongside a group of others and I note the w3 designissues notes. > >> >> Why would Google, Facebook or anyone that build's their business on user >> data choose to let users take that away? >> > > They don't have a choice because the European regulatory framework the > General Data Protection Regulation that comes into force in 2018 is > mandating it. > You also have a whole group of companies working on building businesses > around this premise and one finally finally got funding - > https://techcrunch.com/2016/06/30/digi-me-bags-6-1m-to-put-users-in-the-driving-seat-for-sharing-personal-data/ > Meeco https://meeco.me/ from Australia is doing awesome work (Both there > and in the UK) as is MyDex https://mydex.org/ > > > >> >> Who will offer users a comparable service to these silos that attracts >> them away but adopts Solid and can still make enough money to survive >> competing with the biggest tech companies in the world? >> >> The point is not whether or not the architecture is easy the point is >> whether it has the potential to make anybody any money because if it >> doesn't then I think you will have a hard time persuading people to use it, >> no matter how well it scales. >> > > We have to really get into the weeds of figuring how value flows in these > networks to make it work for the parties involved and be sustainable in the > long run. It will take way more then "architecture". > Fwiw - I far prefer the concept of 'human centric', rather than 'self sovereign'. I also am not confident we have a means to denote a human in a human centric manner yet. I do not think a webid-tls cert with a foaf doc uri stating 'person' does it: and whilst I've explored the idea of allocating ipv6 subnets, through to a grand array of other alternatives, all I have found to date is a bunch of smart people debating concepts, who could ideally cooperate as to define something that works for the most vulnerable on our planet reliable. > If you all want to dive into some of the nitty gritty I invite you to the > Internet Identity Workshop - http://www.internetidentityworkshop.org > If I can find the budget I would very much enjoy the experience. If more info exists, please let me know. Oh, also - what are your ideas about how to put human-centric controls on superintelligent A.I. systems and how they interact with person/s via data? Tim. Holborn :) :) Kaliya > > > >> >> On 15 August 2016 at 14:11, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 15 August 2016 at 14:08, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Solid isn't finished yet. >>>> >>> >>> Solid is at version 0.6 rather than 1.0. >>> >>> But I dont really know what more can be added to it to get it to v1.0. >>> Im using it on a daily basis and it works fine. Some people are >>> perfectionists I suppose :) >>> >>> In any case its IMHO light years ahead of where the rest of the web is, >>> even if you only take small parts of it and use it. >>> >>> You can also argue that solid will never be finished, in the sense that, >>> the web will never be "finished". >>> >>> Its definitely something that can be used today. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, 15 Aug 2016, 10:07 PM Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 15 August 2016 at 11:50, Adrian Hope-Bailie <adrian@hopebailie.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From the article: "The question is whether architecture will be >>>>>> enough." >>>>>> >>>>>> The answer is no. >>>>>> We live in world where few ideas succeed without a strong business >>>>>> case. The architecture is the easy part. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Architecture is deceptively difficult to get right. The vast majority >>>>> if systems start to fall over as they scale. The web and REST are two >>>>> architectures that buck that trend and just get stronger as they scale. >>>>> >>>>> Solid is the next evolution in that architectural trend, imho, because >>>>> it simply embraces the points that made the web great, and extends it a >>>>> little bit, while being 100% backwards compatible. Right now, it's the >>>>> only system that I know of, with this property, in fact, nothing else is >>>>> close. So this in itself, the ability to scale to billions of users, is a >>>>> business case. Quietly facebook adopted the social graph approach to the >>>>> web, and web architectural principles with their graph protocol, and also >>>>> an implementation of WebID. >>>>> >>>>> I think what's true is that few ideas succeed, because simply, we have >>>>> a lot of ideas and a lot of competition. Having a business can help, but >>>>> the right architecture is the magic sauce to get through those scalability >>>>> barriers. >>>>> >>>>> I personally think Solid is the business opportunity of a lifetime, >>>>> perhaps even bigger than the first web. Im certainly investing on that >>>>> basis. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 August 2016 at 10:49, Timothy Holborn < >>>>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Anders, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm using this email to respond to both [1] in creds; in addition to >>>>>>> the below, with some lateral considerations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> See this video where Mr Gates and Mr Musk are discussing in China AI >>>>>>> [2]. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I haven't fully considered the implications, whilst i've certainly >>>>>>> been considering the issue; i have not fully considered it, and as modern >>>>>>> systems become subject to government contracts as may be the case with >>>>>>> enterprise solutions such as those vended by IBM [3], may significantly >>>>>>> lower the cost for government / enterprise, in seeking to achieve very >>>>>>> advanced outcomes - yet i'm unsure the full awareness of how these systems >>>>>>> work, what potential exists for unintended outcomes when work by >>>>>>> web-scientists[4][5] becomes repurposed without their explicit and full >>>>>>> consideration of the original designers for any extended use of their >>>>>>> works, what the underlying considerations are by those who are concerned >>>>>>> [6][7] and how these systems may interact with more advanced HID as i've >>>>>>> kinda tried to describe recently to an audience here [8] and has been >>>>>>> further discussed otherwise [9] [10]. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm a little concerned about the under-resourcing that seems to >>>>>>> plague Manu's / Dave's original vision (that included WebDHT) to the >>>>>>> consultative approach that i believed had alot of merit in how it may >>>>>>> interact with the works of RWW at the time (alongside WebID) which have al >>>>>>> progressed, yet, not seemingly to a solution that i think is 'fit for >>>>>>> purpose' in attending to the issues before us. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have considered the need for people to own their own biometric >>>>>>> signatures. I have considered the work by 'mico-project'[11] seems to be a >>>>>>> good supporter of these future works, particularly given the manner in >>>>>>> which these works support LDP and other related technologies... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the future is still unknown, and what worries me most; is those >>>>>>> who know most about A.I. may not be able to speak about it as a citizen or >>>>>>> stakeholder in the manner defined by way of a magna carta, such as is the >>>>>>> document that hangs on my wall when making such considerations more broadly >>>>>>> in relation to my contributory work/s. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> i understand this herein; contains an array of fragments; yet, am >>>>>>> trying to format schema that leads others to the spot in which i'm >>>>>>> processing broader ideas around what, where and how; progress may be >>>>>>> accelerated and indeed adopted by those capable of pushing it forward. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I remember the github.com/Linkeddata team (in RWW years) wrote a >>>>>>> bunch of things in GO, which is what the IPFS examples showcase, and >>>>>>> without providing exhaustive links, i know Vint has been working in the >>>>>>> field of inter-planetary systems [13], therein also understanding previous >>>>>>> issues relating to JSON-LD support (as noted in [1] or [14] ), which >>>>>>> in-turn may also relate to other statements made overtime about my view >>>>>>> that some of the works incubated by credentials; but not subject to IG or >>>>>>> potential WG support at present - may be better off being developed within >>>>>>> the WebID community as an additional constituent of work that may work >>>>>>> interoperable with WebID-TLS related systems. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Too many Ideas!!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (perhaps some have merit...) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Tim.H. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-credentials/2016Aug/0045.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [2] https://youtu.be/TRpjhIhpuiU?t=16m26s >>>>>>> [3] http://blog.softlayer.com/tag/watson >>>>>>> [4] http://webscience.org/ >>>>>>> [5] https://twitter.com/WebCivics/status/492707794760392704 >>>>>>> [6] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV8EOQNYC-8 >>>>>>> [7] >>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Letter_on_Artificial_Intelligence >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [8] (perhaps not the best reference, but has a bunch of ideas in it: >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RzczQPfygLuowu-WPvaYyKQB0PsSF2COKldj1mjktTs/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTqF3w2yrZI >>>>>>> [10] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x_VpAjim6g >>>>>>> [11] http://www.mico-project.eu/technology/ >>>>>>> [12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CMxDNuuAiQ >>>>>>> [13] http://www.wired.com/2013/05/vint-cerf-interplanetary-internet/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [14] https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs/issues/36 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 at 14:47 Anders Rundgren < >>>>>>> anders.rundgren.net@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2016-08-11 15:16, Melvin Carvalho wrote: >>>>>>>> > Really good article, mentions Solid and other technologies. >>>>>>>> WebID is mentioned by the author in the comments too ... >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > http://www.digitaltrends.com/web/ways-to-decentralize-the-web/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One of the problems with the Web is that there is no easy way >>>>>>>> letting a provider know where you come from (=where your Web resources >>>>>>>> are). This is one reason why OpenID rather created more centralization. >>>>>>>> The same problem is in payments where the credit-card number is used to >>>>>>>> find your bank through complex centralized registers. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Both of these use-cases can be addressed by having URLs + other >>>>>>>> related data such as keys in something like a digital wallet which you >>>>>>>> carry around. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is a snag though: Since each use-case needs special logic, >>>>>>>> keys, attributes etc. it seems hard (probably impossible), coming up with a >>>>>>>> generic Web-browser solution making such schemes rely on extending the >>>>>>>> Web-browser through native-mode platform-specific code. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Although W3C officials do not even acknowledge the mere >>>>>>>> existence(!) of such work, the progress on native extensions schemes has >>>>>>>> actually been pretty good: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webappsec/2016Aug/0005.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is approach to decentralization is BTW not (anymore) a >>>>>>>> research project, it is fully testable in close to production-like settings >>>>>>>> today: >>>>>>>> https://test.webpki.org/webpay-merchant >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The native extensions also support a >>>>>>>> _decentralized_development_model_for_Web_technology_, something which is >>>>>>>> clearly missing in world where a single browser vendor has 80% of the >>>>>>>> mobile browser market! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Anders >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >>
Received on Tuesday, 16 August 2016 18:41:14 UTC